Since talking to Dr.Archibald I have change my presentation fairly dramatically in order to set my rhetorical scene with the sole reliance of images, rather than the words it depended on so heavily before. Instead of just showing the aftermath of an act of destruction paired with some text commenting on the likely conscious of the "destroyer", I am now showing a before, during, and after image for each of the events; this has at least tripled the number of images in the presentation. With such an increase of images, I need to make sure not to rush and just pick the first image that results in the search of a topic, I need to be aware of its purpose before I use it to ensure no conflicting messages or possibly perverse or confusing interpretations. The presentation now follows a serpentine path, more for functionality than meaning, though, one could look at as representative of a serpent , in which case I believe the immediate association would be with Satan in the garden of Eden; and if so, I would hope my presentation could persuade the audience to think about even religious matters in such light. Im finding it relatively difficult to make such an abstract notion more concrete, so in many ways it seems as if im "dumbing down" certain aspects of the presentation, but after viewing the ASUS commercial in class, im now seeing the process as more of a simplification than a nerfing of logic. I see now that it is more important to get a general message across to the majority, than it is to get a more specific and abstract message to a few.
Between my presentation in class and my final prezi I have actually made few changes. For some while I considered a great deal more to try to explain the formula I had developed but the more I thought about it the more I thought that steering away from the formula itself would only serve to confuse the audience. If I had done so there would be no easy way to show the change of direction within the presentation without text, which is something I don't want to have to rely on.
Since talking to Dr.Archibald I have change my presentation fairly dramatically in order to set my rhetorical scene with the sole reliance of images, rather than the words it depended on so heavily before. Instead of just showing the aftermath of an act of destruction paired with some text commenting on the likely conscious of the "destroyer", I am now showing a before, during, and after image for each of the events; this has at least tripled the number of images in the presentation. With such an increase of images, I need to make sure not to rush and just pick the first image that results in the search of a topic, I need to be aware of its purpose before I use it to ensure no conflicting messages or possibly perverse or confusing interpretations. The presentation now follows a serpentine path, more for functionality than meaning, though, one could look at as representative of a serpent , in which case I believe the immediate association would be with Satan in the garden of Eden; and if so, I would hope my presentation could persuade the audience to think about even religious matters in such light. Im finding it relatively difficult to make such an abstract notion more concrete, so in many ways it seems as if im "dumbing down" certain aspects of the presentation, but after viewing the ASUS commercial in class, im now seeing the process as more of a simplification than a nerfing of logic. I see now that it is more important to get a general message across to the majority, than it is to get a more specific and abstract message to a few.
Between my presentation in class and my final prezi I have actually made few changes. For some while I considered a great deal more to try to explain the formula I had developed but the more I thought about it the more I thought that steering away from the formula itself would only serve to confuse the audience. If I had done so there would be no easy way to show the change of direction within the presentation without text, which is something I don't want to have to rely on.